Saturday, March 09, 2019
Deploy the stick!!!
"Deploy the Stick.... Deploy the Stick..."pic.twitter.com/Ayj2U9qpxf— Sgt Plod (@MetPolSgt) March 9, 2019
Never done this...looks cool though. Wonder how you learn this thing...seems instinctive but never seen US cops or even special ops utilizing this technique.
US Army wants new 30mm turrets for its Strykers, AMPVs and M-113s..
 |
| Is the Army being short sighted here? Why not standardize on a real medium caliber that will be proficient into the future. The 50mm offering from these bubbas seems to fit the bill... |
via Army Times.
The Army is looking for information on a remote weapons system and an unmanned turret for its 30mm cannon for a few of its ground vehicles.Story here.
The post on the federal business opportunities website, fbo.gov, is asking industry for information on a system that will need to operate both the 30mm cannon and a 7.62 machine gun aboard a “medium sized combat vehicle platform” such as the Stryker, M113 and the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle.
It must also have a thermal camera with 70 percent identification of targets the size of a NATO vehicle to a range of 4 km or more.
Some of you might not remember but I predicted an "armor revolution". Quite honestly I thought it would happen with the Chinese introducing a new series of armored vehicles but I forgot how they operate. They follow and copy. They don't innovate.
So what are we seeing.
Strangely enough its our allies that are pushing the envelope. Especially the Aussies.
Because they've been running competitions for their next generation of armored fighting vehicles we've seen manufacturers step up in ways we haven't seen in at least a couple of decades.
Now with the US Army seeking to upgrade its vehicles that pace is quickening.
But I wonder. Are they doing it right or are they aiming too low?
To be a bit more clear, is the request for a 30mm cannon the correct 'ask for'? Should they aim higher and go with at minimum a 40mm cannon or my current favorite a 50mm cannon to allow for a one time upgrade that will be viable into the future?
Can't lie. The more I read about the ballistics the more I like these new medium caliber offerings. With the right fire control and optics we can achieve one shot kills so the loadout because equal to the higher round count of the 30mm cannons.
Just wondering. I don't know for sure and I can be persuaded that I'm barking up the wrong tree but at a glance the bigger caliber seems worth chasing.
Friday, March 08, 2019
Sorry guys....gotta talk politics...this lady is trashing the Dem opportunity to win in 2020...
via Free Beacon.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) trashed former President Barack Obama in a new profile of the freshman lawmaker, saying the "hope and change" he offered was a mirage and he was one of many predecessors to President Donald Trump to have "really bad policies."Story here.
Omar was the subject of a Politico story on her and fellow Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips (D., Minn.), who represents a neighboring district. The two are framed as symbolizing the colliding forces in the new Democratic House majority, with Omar representing the far-left flank and Phillips the more center-left sensibilities that helped recapture suburban districts from Republicans in 2018.
Omar, a Somali-born refugee, was fed up with the Democratic establishment by the time she ran for office in 2016 for a seat in the Minnesota state house. She won and then easily captured a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2018, and she wasn't shy about telling Politico her objections to Obama-era policies, like detention centers for illegal immigrant children and the "droning of countries around the world:"
Wow. I've been watching this lady for awhile now. I've watched the controversy she got caught up in and I avoided talking about it. Her story WAS inspirational and to go from Somali immigrant to a member of Congress WAS kinda cool.
But man is she digging her own grave ... politically that is.
But the bigger takeaway is what this means for 2020. Unless the Dems get this radical wing of their party under control they'll have no chance in 2020.
I'm not blind.
I'm seeing alot of behavior from the current administration that is making my pulse rise. Some of the policies are good to go. Some are a continuation of failure from past administrations. Others are just looney.
That's par for the course in American politics.
These freshmen Dems though. They're kinda out of control. I don't see how the party can recover.
Key piece of F-35 logistics system unusable by US Air Force students, instructor pilots via Defense News!!!
via DN
The F-35 fighter jet’s logistics backbone has proven so clunky and burdensome to work with that the U.S. Air Force’s instructor pilots, as well as students learning to fly the aircraft, have stopped using the system, Defense News has learned.Story here.
The Autonomic Logistics Information System, built by F-35 manufacturer Lockheed Martin, was supposed to consolidate training, maintenance and supply chain management functions into a single entity, making it easier for users to input data and oversee the jet’s health and history throughout its life span.
ALIS has been a disappointment to maintainers in the field, with updates coming behind schedule and many workarounds needed so it functions as designed. But the Air Force’s F-35A instructor and student pilots at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, and Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, were so disappointed with the performance of ALIS’ training system that they bailed entirely, confirmed Col. Paul Moga, commander of Eglin’s 33rd Fighter Squadron.
“The functionality in ALIS with regards to TMS — the training management system — was such a source of frustration and a time waste to the instructor pilots and the simulator instructors and the academic instructors that we at [Air Education and Training Command] in coordination with us [at Eglin] and Luke made a call almost a year ago to stop using the program,” Moga said during a Feb. 26 interview.
Just plain wow! They've dumped this puppy for over a year and we're just hearing about it now????
Additionally all the fanboys that say listen to the pilots...are we suppose to ignore this now?
Read the article and marvel at the corruption surrounding this program and curse leadership that has allowed this festering boil to suck up so much of the US defense budget.
Pics before death....
Check them all out here. Chilling stuff...especially the crime related images...
 |
| Reynaldo Dagsa, Filipino politician was innocently taking a photograph of his family. He accidentally captured his assassin in the same photograph, moments before he was shot dead, right behind his family. |
 |
| This picture was taken by an innocent hiker in New Jersey. She saw a bear on her trail, and moments after the picture was taken, the hiker was killed by this very bear. |
They're not Chinese "fishing boats" they're Chinese Naval Militia acting on behalf of their national strategy/policy goals!
Chinese ship reportedly rams and sinks a Vietnamese fishing boat in the Paracels (again). China's neighbors have become so numb to the constant exercise of low-intensity violence and intimidation that it will warrant barely a mention in regional press. https://t.co/fgumeS3MXR— Greg Poling (@GregPoling) March 7, 2019
This is infuriating. I didn't post on it but I saw a vid of Chinese "fishing boats" off the coast of the Philippines. Essentially it was a blockade and its purpose was to keep Philippine fishermen from plying their trade.
It's my understanding that the Philippine Navy did not respond to the provocation.
Meanwhile the US Navy is doing shows of force, sailing thru the South China Sea while this is happening.
Now?
Now we have this travesty.
China is a threat. Not to a false world order but to peace and prosperity expected by all free nations.
This is heading toward a boil. We either steel ourselves, act on our timetable or we wait for a body blow that could stun us into inaction. Better to throttle the dragon while he's gathering his strength than to wait for the fire.
Once again the animal kingdom teaches brutal lessons....
When you are so focused on internel petty issues and refuse to see the larger threats coming at you. A great illustration from the real world pic.twitter.com/hjXs94PZOr— Aviator Anil Chopra (@Chopsyturvey) March 8, 2019
Focus on real threats not petty squabbles!!!
Royal Australian Navy Frigates get CEAFAR L-band long range radars...via Naval Analysis Twitter Page...
Another upgrade for the #RAN ANZAC-class frigates. The ships are being fitted with the CEAFAR L-band long-range air-search radar. The mast before and after the installation of the new radar. pic.twitter.com/rMQTcCpFim— Naval Analyses (@D__Mitch) March 8, 2019
Hmm. If I recall my reading of Air Power Australia, L-band radars are particularly effective against stealth aircraft.
You sneaky Aussie bastards!
Navy SEAL and MARSOC Marine seeking plea deals in Special Forces Soldier's strangulation death...
via Military.com
Two of the four special operators charged with murder in the strangulation death of a Green Beret staff sergeant are negotiating plea deals with government prosecutors.Story here.
The Daily Beast reported earlier this week that Navy SEAL Chief Petty Officer Adam C. Matthews and Marine Raider Staff Sgt. Kevin Maxwell are working out plea deals for the charges they face in connection with the death of Army Green Beret Staff Sgt. Logan Melgar, 34, in Bamako, Mali on June 4, 2017.
Military Times has verified the report through sources close to the investigation.
Attorneys for both men declined to comment as to whether they were negotiating deals. Brian Bouffard, Maxwell’s attorney, told Military Times he could not discuss the case. Grover Baxley, Matthews’ attorney, said that it would “inappropriate to comment on possible plea negotiations.”
Best of the best? This is some drunken LCPL shit after the idiots snuck into the Corps with gang ties back home.
I hope the prosecutor doesn't extend ANY plea deal.
These bastards need to burn. This is absolutely disgusting. SOCOM needs to clean house .... they've grown too large and obviously aren't selective enough. With out of area operations. Independent operations mixed with huge sums of cash, access to drugs and an obvious tendency to go native, its time to reign these bubbas in.
Warrior IFV with integrated 40mm Cannon via Shepard Media...
NOTE! Follow Gunship Girl's Twitter Page. That chic has been killing it lately!
WARRIOR IFV WITH INTEGRATED CT40 CANNON from Shephard Media on Vimeo.
Subcontractors gathered together to witness their contributions to the Warrior IFV upgrade programme. For many it was the first time they witnessed the CT40 cannon integrated onto the Warrior IFV. The IFV is now entering Reliability Growth Trials, expected to last until June 2020.
Quick off topic question. How many of you use Vimeo? Are you satisfied with the platform?
WARRIOR IFV WITH INTEGRATED CT40 CANNON from Shephard Media on Vimeo.
Subcontractors gathered together to witness their contributions to the Warrior IFV upgrade programme. For many it was the first time they witnessed the CT40 cannon integrated onto the Warrior IFV. The IFV is now entering Reliability Growth Trials, expected to last until June 2020.
Quick off topic question. How many of you use Vimeo? Are you satisfied with the platform?
LHDs are once again being pushed as solid alternatives to our supercarriers...
via War On The Rocks...
Just as Delilah stole Samson’s strength by cutting his long locks, the carrier has been shorn of its long-range striking power by decisions to focus on short-range F-18s and F-35s. In addition, the Navy’s decision to limit a promising unmanned platform to an airborne tanker role and foregoing its strike capability is unfortunate at a time when enemy capabilities demand greater, not less, range and lethality. In simplest terms, the carrier can’t get to the fight if it involves China and is seriously challenged by Russia in certain areas. China has developed ship-killing missiles that threaten the carrier and its 5,000 crew members well beyond their effective range, while Russia is improving its manned and unmanned undersea forces. Additionally, long-range cruise missiles are proliferating globally and emerging hypersonic weapons will expand the carrier’s vulnerability even farther. Thus, within the context of the National Defense Strategy, the carrier is relegated to a sweep-up combat role. For deterrence missions, a big deck amphibious ship with fifth generation aircraft, paired with medium-altitude long-endurance drones, would be much more efficient than a super-carrier. For these missions, the carrier’s high-sortie generation capacities are not required and its high-signature and iconic value provide an enticing target for a bolt out of the blue attack. Its exorbitant price cannot be justified for bit parts, especially when technology allows for cheaper and more effective alternatives in the form of smaller, more distributed manned and unmanned platforms.Story here.
Advocates argue that because the carrier is hard to sink, it is worth the investment. This really misses the point. The carrier is hard to sink when kept out of the thickest weapons engagement zone and fully escorted. Left unsaid is that when so disposed, the carrier’s short-range air wing is ineffective. It also matters that sinking is a bad metric. It is much easier to prevent a carrier from performing its mission by targeting a critical subcomponent, like its radar, either physically with a missile or drone or through a cyber-attack. Such arguments also ignore the tremendous distorting influence the cost of carrier, the carrier air wing, and its escorts have on the Navy’s shipbuilding account. Perhaps these exorbitant costs could be ignored in the immediate post-Cold War Era when we were the sole hegemon, economically and militarily, but those days are gone, and it matters greatly that we receive the greatest possible return on our investments. An ineffectual floating monument to past glories is not the way to win a great power competition.
In contrast to the super carrier, current amphibious ships are less escalatory, more compatible with allied forces, and cheaper and more efficient for the presence and engagement missions called for in the National Defense Strategy. Thus, their mission is not obsolete, but the current design of amphibious ships makes them vulnerable and lucrative targets. Small enemy combatants and long-range precision munitions can slay these very large and capable ships as David did Goliath.
Given the ongoing debate about anti-access and area denial threats posed by peer adversaries, there are those who question the continued utility of currently planned amphibious ships. It is not entirely clear whether these critics are motivated by a belief in mission or design obsolescence, or both, but the reasoning on this matters. It would be a mistake to cut current amphibious ships without a plan to replace them with a new design because a range of traditional and emerging amphibious operations are critically important to deterrence, sea control, and power projection missions, not just traditional amphibious missions.
In sum, amphibious ships have increasing mission utility given that the amphibious mission space has been expanded to encompass sea control and sea denial missions, but they suffer from design obsolescence. Alternatively, carriers suffer from mission obsolescence, since technology is offering more efficient and effective ways to provide ISR and strike to the fleet (unmanned and missiles). Thus, the carrier problem is more fundamental: A new design will not fix its problem. As Adm. John Fisher stated regarding Royal Navy modernization in 1902, “nothing can possibly bring an ‘OUT-OF-DATE’ ship ‘UP-TO-DATE’! You simply can’t do it!”
I am stunned.
I can't believe we're actually here and HQMC isn't seeking to stomp out discussions like these with a quickness!
You do get the force of connection don't you?
There are commentators out there that are attempting to make the LHDs compete with our supercarriers! This is bad juju. This will be ultimately destructive...to the Navy and to the Marines if it isn't checked immediately.
You do know where this talk comes from don't you?
It all has its roots in the L-class carrier talk that came out of nowhere and was pushed to give the F-35 a bit of traction. Now? Now it's starting to threaten a part of our naval force structure...an important part of it.
The whole thing though on a practical level is insane in my view. Decreased sortie generation is unimportant? Carrying fewer strike fighters is unimportant? The F-35 is short ranged but on an LHD it's irrelevant but on a supercarrier its a detriment?
Am I wrong?
Is the LHD an adequate replacement for the supercarrier?
Today, 54 years ago, Marines were the first U.S. combat troops to land in Vietnam.
Today, 54 years ago, Marines were the first U.S. combat troops to land in Vietnam. pic.twitter.com/80MjoXMgKu— U.S. Marines (@USMC) March 8, 2019
Norway to choose between upgrading Leopard 2A4NO or buying a new tank
via Army Recognition
The modernization project of the Leopard 2A4NO of the Norwegian Army seems abandoned. Norway would prefer the purchase of a new battle tank by 2025, reveals an annual report detailing the defense acquisitions of the country for the next eight years.Story here.
Formally abandoned last June, the 5050 Leopard 2 Upgrades Project concerning the some 30 units still operational among the 52 in the park, has not been followed by any decision on the future of this component, Nathan Gain reports on Forces Operations. The only certainty is that a reduced armored capacity would be maintained until 2025, by which time Oslo should choose between acquiring a new tank or an interim solution. In the meantime, the Norwegian Defense would release from 7 to 20 M € by 2024 to preserve its tank fleet.
Nine months later, the first option seems to dominate: the Norwegian army will maintain three mechanized battalions, all equipped with a modern battle tank. A conceptual study is underway to assess, among other things, the number of vehicles required and their capabilities, says the Norwegian Defense.
Against Russia or China the US gets its ass handed to it in battle simulations...
via Breaking Defense.
The US keeps losing, hard, in simulated wars with Russia and China. Bases burn. Warships sink. But we could fix the problem for about $24 billion a year, one well-connected expert said, less than four percent of the Pentagon budget.------------------------------
“In our games, when we fight Russia and China,” RAND analyst David Ochmanek said this afternoon, “blue gets its ass handed to it.” In other words, in RAND’s wargames, which are often sponsored by the Pentagon, the US forces — colored blue on wargame maps — suffer heavy losses in one scenario after another and still can’t stop Russia or China — red — from achieving their objectives, like overrunning US allies.
No, it’s not a Red Dawn nightmare scenario where the Commies conquer Colorado. But losing the Baltics or Taiwan would shatter American alliances, shock the global economy, and topple the world order the US has led since World War II.
Worst of all, Work and Ochmanek said, the US doesn’t just take body blows, it takes a hard hit to the head as well. Its communications satellites, wireless networks, and other command-and-control systems suffer such heavy hacking and jamming that they are, in Ochmanek’s words, “suppressed, if not shattered.”-----------------------------
The US has wargamed cyber and electronic warfare in field exercises, Work said, but the simulated enemy forces tend to shut down US networks so effectively that nothing works and nobody else gets any training done. “Whenever we have an exercise and the red force really destroys our command and control, we stop the exercise,” Work said, instead of trying to figure out how to keep fighting when your command post gives you nothing but blank screens and radio static.
The Chinese call this “system destruction warfare,” Work said: They plan to “attack the American battle network at all levels, relentlessly, and they practice it all the time.”
Work was a little harder-edged. He said cutting a carrier and two amphibious ships over the forthcoming 2020-2024 budget “seems right to me.” He argued the US Army has way too many brigade combat teams — tanks and infantry — and way too little missile defense to protect them. And he bemoaned reports the US Air Force will retire the B-1 bomber, one of its few long-range strike aircraft: If the Air Force doesn’t want them, he said, give them to the Navy, revive the old VPB “Patrol Bomber” squadrons, and load them with Long-Range Anti-Ship Missiles to sink the Chinese navy.Story here.
Took them long enough but they're finally starting to sing the SNAFU! song. I like it but I have to wonder if the Pentagon is so far down the track on this one that they can't course correct. I hope they can. BUT! At least someone has come around to the reality of things.
Hey Work! Welcome to the party pal!
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)